Article Feedback A new way to improve Wikipedia

Fabrice Florin Product Manager, Editor Engagement

Wikimedia Foundation

July 13, 2012

Article Feedback

Readers give

suggestions

Editors make

improvements

Feedback Form SCREENSHOT

Feedback Form SCREENSHOT

SCREENSHOT Reader’s View

SCREENSHOT

Editor’s View

SCREENSHOT

Monitor’s View

Feedback Flow

Readers give

suggestions

Editors make

improvements

F. Florin – Wikimedia Foundation – 7/10/2012

ABC Article . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Feedback on ABC -------------------------- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Post feedback

Feedback Flow

Readers give

suggestions

Readers become editors

F. Florin – Wikimedia Foundation – 7/10/2012

ABC Article . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Feedback on ABC -------------------------- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Edit article

Research

Research Questions

•  Can article feedback engage readers to contribute? •  Is article feedback useful for improving Wikipedia?

•  Can posting feedback convert readers into editors?

First results

•  160,000 feedback posts since Dec. 2011 (small test: 0.65% of English Encyclopedia for 6 months)

•  ~70% of posts have comments

•  ~98% of posts are from anonymous users

•  ~70% of 5k users surveyed like the feedback form

•  article feedback can engage readers to contribute

(findings from Dec. 2011 to Jun. 2012)

Source: Wikimedia Foundation - Jan.-June 2012 Studies

Projected volume

Contribution Type Posts per month

Feedback posts w/ comments * 1.2 million

All Feedback posts 1.5 million

All Article Edits ** 2.1 million

Estimated monthly feedback posts for English Encyclopedia

* Based on Wikimedia feedback study and en-wiki pageview stats for Apr. 2012. Metrics study 2 – April-May 2012 – See report.

** Edit count based on actual April data on en-wiki, no bots.

Usefulness

Findings % Total

Useful 45%

Not useful 55%

Hide 22%

Feedback evaluations of 900 random posts by 20 experienced Wikipedia editors. Results above are based on posts found useful by 2 editors (‘everyone’)

Study conducted Feb. - April 2012 – See report.

Much of the feedback is found useful by experienced editors.

Usefulness

These findings are consistent across a range of different studies.

Feedback evaluations of 900 random posts by 20 experienced Wikipedia editors. Results above are based on posts found useful by 2 editors (‘everyone’)

Study conducted Feb. - April 2012 – See report.

Useful

I would suggest editing the line on migration that states "The Great Famine brought a large influx of irish immigrants." Given that Ireland was part of the United Kingdom at the time of the Great Famine then it is wrong to suggest that domestic population migration is described as 'immigration'.

Not so useful MITT ROMNEY IS UNDERMINING HEALTHCARE WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO THE HIPPOCRATIC OAT

This page incorrectly cites Clarence Clemons death as happening in "July 2011," but Clarence actually passed away a month prior on June 18th, 2011.

I still don't know what a Higgs Boson is because it takes a physicist just to get through the first paragraph - there is no analogy or example to clarify this invisible thing.

There were never any American or Allied troops buried in Orglandes at any time. This was only a German Cemetery started by the 603rd Graves Registration Company June 1944.

Sample Comments

Converting readers into editors MOCKUP

Indirect Call to Edit SCREENSHOT

An indirect call to action is displayed after posting feedback. (1E)

Direct Call to Edit SCREENSHOT

A direct call to action is displayed instead of feedback form. (4E)

New editors GRAPH

No feedback These figures are for new editors, not edits. Source: Wikimedia Foundation - Apr.-May 2012 Study.

Edit productivity

GRAPH

No feedback Feedback form Call to action

Less productive

(indirect) (direct)

These figures are for individual edits, not editors. Source: Wikimedia Foundation - Apr.-May 2012 Study.

Conversions

•  posting feedback converts many more readers into editors •  no cannibalization (feedback doesn’t reduce new editor rate)

•  direct calls to action generate more conversions *

•  indirect calls to action lead to more productive edits **

* These figures are for new editors, not edits. ** These figures are for individual edits, not editors. Source: Wikimedia Foundation - Apr.-May 2012 Study.

Key take-aways

•  feedback forms make it easy for readers to participate •  comments provide useful suggestions to editors

•  posting feedback converts many readers into editors

Open Questions

•  will editors use this feedback to improve articles?

•  how much monitoring is needed to filter inappropriate posts? •  can this lead readers and editors to collaborate productively?

We won’t have all the answers until we are fully deployed.

Community

A collaboration with the community

Foundation: User: Fabrice Florin User: Howief User: Pginer User: Jorm User: Epoch Fail User: Roan Kattouw User: Okeyes (WMF) User: Eloquence User: Mlitn User: DarTar User: Heatherawalls … and many more

Community: User: Bensin User: Dougweller User: Fluffernutter User: GorillaWarfare User: Looie496 User: Risker User: RJHall User: Sonia User: The Helpful One User: Tom Morris User: Utar … and many more

Community Ideas This release •  Add a comment box •  Ask: "Did you find what you were looking for?” •  Make feedback tool more visually compact •  Show different calls to action •  Dashboard with recent feedback posts •  Let registered users track their feedback •  Courtesy diff link to the rated revision Future releases •  Show feedback on my watch list •  Promote useful feedback to talk page •  Combine best posts into a to-do list •  Add checkboxes for common improvements •  Hide AFT for recently created pages •  Comments feed via RSS/API

Join the discussion: Wikipedia_talk:Article_Feedback_Tool/Version_5

Interaction Workflow

Monitoring tools

Readers

Edit page

Abuse filter

Relevance filter

Feedback page

Article page

Talk page Permalink page

Central Feedback

page

Editors

Central Activity

logs

Monitors

Oversighters

Primary flow Secondary flow Increases feedback list Decrease feedback list

Flaggers

Feedback link

Feedback form

Calls to action

How to edit

View feedback

Filter / sort

Reader tools: Helpful / Flag

Filter / sort

• Reader tools • Monitor tools • Meta data

• Article feedback • Suppression log

Labels

F. Florin – Wikimedia – 4/21/2012

Impact

•  Makes it easier to improve Wikipedia.

•  Provides on-ramps for readers.

•  Offers useful tools for editors.

•  Creates new ways for users to collaborate.

WP:AFT Try it out!

Links & Info

Learn more Video Tour bit.ly/aft-video-tour Walkthrough Tutorial Wikipedia:Feedback_walkthrough Help Page Wikipedia:Article_Feedback/Help/Editors

Try it out Article page with feedback form Golden-crowned_Sparrow Article feedback page Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Golden-crowned_Sparrow Central feedback page Special:ArticleFeedbackv5

User: Fabrice Florin Product Manager, Editor Engagement Wikimedia Foundation Email: fflorin@wikimedia.org Twitter: @fabriceflorin Editor Engagement Hub: Wikipedia:Editor_Engagement